Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

25 questions · 30 findings · 2 reviews · Oral medicine and oral cancer

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 5 · 16.7%GRADE not reported 24 · 80%Very low 0 · 0%Low 1 · 3.3%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers vs No screening

Test performance (sensitivity and specificity) · Apparently healthy adults aged 35 years or older (general population), living in 13 clusters in rural areas of Trivandrum city, Kerala,…

1 finding from 1 review

Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer 2013 · Cochrane All outcomes
15-year follow-up
Across the four cycles (15 years), the reported sensitivity of the visual examination in detecting oral cancer was 67.4% (188/279). No information on the specificity or the positive predictive value of the programme…
1 study
GRADE not reported

Toluidine blue (visual staining) vs No screening

Outcome not reported · Planned population: general population or high-risk / opportunistic screening groups (no eligible study)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer 2013 · Cochrane All outcomes
There was no evidence to support the use of adjunctive technologies like toluidine blue, brush biopsy or fluorescence imaging as a screening tool to reduce oral cancer mortality; no eligible randomised controlled trial…
0 studies
No studies found

Brush biopsy (oral cytology) vs No screening

Outcome not reported · Planned population: general population or high-risk / opportunistic screening groups (no eligible study)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer 2013 · Cochrane All outcomes
There was no evidence to support the use of adjunctive technologies like toluidine blue, brush biopsy or fluorescence imaging as a screening tool to reduce oral cancer mortality; no eligible randomised controlled trial…
0 studies
No studies found

Fluorescence imaging / light-based techniques vs No screening

Outcome not reported · Planned population: general population or high-risk / opportunistic screening groups (no eligible study)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer 2013 · Cochrane All outcomes
There was no evidence to support the use of adjunctive technologies like toluidine blue, brush biopsy or fluorescence imaging as a screening tool to reduce oral cancer mortality; no eligible randomised controlled trial…
0 studies
No studies found

Visual screening (oral visual inspection) by trained health workers vs No screening

Survival (proportion alive after diagnosis) · Apparently healthy adults aged 35 years or older (general population), living in 13 clusters in rural areas of Trivandrum city, Kerala,…

1 finding from 1 review

Screening programmes for the early detection and prevention of oral cancer 2013 · Cochrane All outcomes
5-year survival
A significantly higher five-year survival rate was reported in the screened group (55.5%) compared to the control (43.4%) (P value = 0.003).
1 study · 523 participants
GRADE not reported